with SQL, there is no need to use pcre. just do that in the SQL query to
avoid having to keep an external file up to date...
...except that the + (and everything between it and the @) is *not*
actually part of the email address. To use your address as an example:
When Postfix receives an
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 09:12:00AM -0800, Charles Boling wrote:
mouss:
with SQL, there is no need to use pcre. just do that in the SQL
query to avoid having to keep an external file up to date...
...except that the + (and everything between it and the @) is
*not* actually part of the
Charles Boling a écrit :
with SQL, there is no need to use pcre. just do that in the SQL query to
avoid having to keep an external file up to date...
...except that the + (and everything between it and the @) is *not*
actually part of the email address.
of course the + is part of the email
LuKreme a écrit :
On 16-Jan-2010, at 12:24, Wietse Venema wrote:
To address that issue, I would like to be able to use another character
(_ or .) that is commonly accepted as part of email addresses, instead.
Address transformation mappings are always queried at recipient
validation time, so
I've been a postfix user for nearly 10 years, but in many ways I'm still
quite the newbie. That's the problem with Postfix being such a solid
MTA: I don't mess with it much. :-)
For a good chunk of that time, I have wrestled on and off with this
problem off and on, playing with it for a bit,
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Charles Boling
junk01+post...@boling.us wrote:
I've been a postfix user for nearly 10 years, but in many ways I'm still
quite the newbie. That's the problem with Postfix being such a solid
MTA: I don't mess with it much. :-)
For a good chunk of that time, I
Charles Boling:
I've been a postfix user for nearly 10 years, but in many ways I'm still
quite the newbie. That's the problem with Postfix being such a solid
MTA: I don't mess with it much. :-)
For a good chunk of that time, I have wrestled on and off with this
problem off and on, playing
On 16-Jan-2010, at 12:24, Wietse Venema wrote:
To address that issue, I would like to be able to use another character
(_ or .) that is commonly accepted as part of email addresses, instead.
Address transformation mappings are always queried at recipient
validation time, so you can't use a
